Skip to main content

About your Search

20121224
20130101
STATION
CSPAN 10
MSNBCW 8
CSPAN2 5
CNNW 2
LINKTV 2
FBC 1
KBCW (CW) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
WHUT (Howard University Television) 1
LANGUAGE
English 34
Search Results 0 to 33 of about 34 (some duplicates have been removed)
to reduce the deficit. one trillion dollars in spending cuts over the next 10 years but these changes would result in more savings in the next 10 years and would solve our deficit problems for a decade. they say their biggest priority is dealing with the deficit. they are behaving and protecting the tax breaks for the wealthiest americans. that seems to be their overriding theme. host: a new development yesterday, the vice president joe biden was called in by mitch mcconnell, who said he needed a dance partner in all of this. guest: if you remember on friday, the president said he was going to turn over the lead to senator reid and senator mcconnell to work out a deal that could pass the senate and that he would sign on to whatever deal that was. senator reid and senator mcconnell were not able to reach that deal. the negotiations between them have turned increasingly bitter and senator mcconnell basically said that he could not work with senator read anymore and reached out to joe biden and ask him to resume the role that he has had in previous negotiations. the arbiter, the deal maker. jo
deficit and debt and then a more recent one that passes an extension of all the bush tax cuts. so the their position right now, at least speaker boehner's is, hey, it is time for the senate to act on some of our bills. we'll keep an eye what is happening there. heather: busy day for them. president obama taking his case to the american public. here is what he had to say about the situation playing out on capitol hill. >> what's been holding us back is the dysfunction here in washington and if, you know, people start to see that on january 1st this problem still hasn't been solved, that we haven't seen the deficit reduction we could have had, the republicans been willing to take the deal i gave them, if they say, that people's taxes have gone up, which means consumer spending is going to be depressed, obviously that will adverse reaction in the markets. heather: there is lot at stake for all americans. three big issues on the financial front this morning as a matter of fact,. stu varney, host of "varney & company" on the fox business network joins us now. stu, no deal on capitol hi
agreement, a bigger deal, a grand bargain or whatever you want to call it, that solves the deficit problems in a balanced and responsible way that does not just deal with taxes but also spending so that we can put all this behind us and focus on growing our economy. with this congress, that was obviously too much to hope for at this time. [laughter] maybe we can do it in stages. we will solve this problem instead in several steps. in 2011, we started reducing the deficit through $1 trillion in spending cuts which have taken place. the agreement being worked on right now would further reduce the deficit by asking the wealthiest 2% of americans to pay higher taxes for the first time in two decades so that would add additional hundreds of billions of dollars to deficit reduction. that is progress but we will need to do more. keep in mind that just last month, republicans in congress of they would not agree to raise tax rates on the wealthiest americans and the agreement being discussed would raise those rates permanently. [applause] keep in mind, we will still have more work to do. we still ha
half a trillion dollars a year, $5 trillion over ten years worth of deficit. that's because while we grew the -- under bush the taxes revenue went up 25%, and spending went up 100% in the last 12 years. if you put back the revenue from the higher taxes, you still have a deficit. that's what we're trying to change. >> we kind of are where we are, and no one is talking about spending cuts. they're talking about keeps taxes low, which everybody agrees. let me ask a specific question first to the democrats here. if they came out with with a deal that said, all right, we will keep tax rates for those making $400,000 or less, would you vote for na? >> candy, i'm willing to come to the middle. i think we've got to all be willing to come to the middle. >> that's a yes? >> i want to say something else very important, and that is for two years now we have only been focusing on spending cuts. in the last two years we've put in place $1.6 trillion in spending cuts. we have put in place spending reductions under medicare of over 700 billion by cutting overpayments to insurance companies and so on
't seen the deficit reduction that we could have had, the republicans willing to take a deal that i give them. if they say that people's taxes have gone up, which means consumer spending is depressed, then it's going to have an adverse reaction in the markets. >> there was much more to what the president had to say. listen to what he had to say on deficits and spending. >> you are not only going to cut your way to prosperity. one of the fallacies, i think, that has been promoted is this notion that deficit reduction is only a matter of cutting programs that are really important to seniors, students and so forth. that has to be part of the mix. but, what i ran on and what the american people elected me to do is put forward a balances approached. >> i want you to listen to something else. the president spoke about the tragedy in newtown, connecticut. he described it in a way he's not quite done so publicly before. listen to this. >> this is something that, you know, that was the worst day of my presidency. it's not something that i want to see repeated. >> it hit close to home? >> absolute
the wealthiest americans, to deal with some of the deficit. your sense of whether president obama and your fellow democrats in the senate and house will stay the course on this or will eventually compromise in a way that many progressives would regret? >> first of all, we have a divided government. president obama's election said one message, the election of republican house of representatives since another. the actually, working at odds here. you have republicans who will not raise taxes for anyone making more than $250,000 a year, and looking at entitlement cuts. yet democrats that say you have any taxes for those who make under $250,000 and no cuts to the low-you had democrats as a you have no taxes for those -- no tax cuts for those making under $250,000. we're going the wrong direction. why have we been talking about stimulating the economy through jobs? we seem to accept a certain amount of unemployment as being necessary for the proper functioning of the economy, so that for corporations and will keep wages low. that is baloney. we are creating our own economic vice that is entrapping tens
of these politicians, mayors, governors should take a half cut pay to pay down the deficit. host: we are going to move on to darwin on the line for independents. caller: it is like the pentelikon, back in 1968 i was even fighting with the pentagon over budgets. you always had to have everything kept the same. nobody was going to change anything because next year there were going to pop everything by 10%. they told you got to worry because you would get 10% more. that goes all the way back to 1968. they just keep dwelling on one thing over and over again. i would like to know from the boston globe or the herald is asking for pictures of -- host: let's move on to del on the line for democrats. caller: this is an outrage that they cannot tax the wealthy by an additional 4%. this is the lowest tax rates that have ever paid in the united states. considering that their incomes are vast compared to what they used to be many years ago when they paid a much higher rate, they are wealthy and they do not want to pay. 4% does not amount to enough to affect the deficit. maybe we ought to consider 15% or something
across the country. we talk about reducing deficits and having a responsible budget for 20 years. this is actually, it will you go over the cliff and nothing changes, the largest single day of the deficit reduction in world history. it is $600 billion in deficit reduction trust by the turn in the calendar. over the long term, you look at what that does, we are in much better shape over the long term by going off the cliff. the problem is that right now, we are still very slowly recovering from the worst financial crisis it had since the great depression. it probably is not the time to be having such large deficit reduction. that is why we and others have been focused on getting some kind of a larger deal that can ensure we do not have this extensive short-term deficit reduction. if we start to deal with these problems now, we can do so adequately and without too much short-term economic pain and helping the economy. from let's go to patricia oak creek, wisconsin on the democratic line. caller: good morning, and happy new year to the both of you. i feel so sad for our poor country
their deficit and we cannot, the world will switch to euros. there is a tweet here -- guest: the cbo is supposed to be a political, but it cannot be too alarmist. if we go over the cliff, we are looking on january 1, some of this is already milton. about $600 million -- $650 billion in spending cuts and tax increases. that is about 4% of gdp. that is an enormous negative stimulus. a detraction from demand. that would surely be a deep recession. the cbo relies on simulation models that did not take into consideration investor sentiment, the reaction of consumers, and so forth that they wholly lose confidence in their government. if we go over the cliff and stay there, people will start to conclude that washington cannot manage its affairs. all bets are off on economic modeling. it is impossible to say what happened that other than it would be very negative. host: one piece that you actually did right has this headline -- take the idea of a recession next year. with the perspective of everything else going on, when a recession look like? guest: it depends on how we get there. if we have a fiscal c
, because when g.o.p. is in the white house, deficits don't matter. can you tell us a little bit about the philosophies of the two candidates? well now, the president and the ex-candidate. will the situation be that much different if there was a different man in the white house? guest: well, look, it's an interesting question. it is certainly true that tax policy was one of the key sort of issues in the last election. and actually, the debate that we're having if it sounds familiar, it's because we've had it several times before. it was really a similar debate to what we had in 2008. we had the same debate in 2010. we had a similar debate in 2011 when we were dealing with the debt ceiling issue the first time around. and we dealt it with it in the last election. and the differences have always been that president obama has maintained that tax cuts should be allowed to expire for people making more than $250,000. mitt romney called for extending all the tax cuts fully. and making other changes to the tax code. but, you know, i mean, he wouldn't be in office right now anyway. so i think
trillion dollar deficits, both sides are being decided, and start talking about this. stuart: what is the media doing? >> typically cobbling barack obama. this guy is filing his nails while the republicans twist themselves into knots. the media are giving obama a complete pass on this one and not holding his feet to the fire on anything and keeping the gun fire on the republicans at all times. the media have been just about as silent as anyone else. all the media accept for stuart varney. stuart: flattery is the fondest milk in television. i have a prediction from you. i personally think there will be some kind of awful last-minute deal, tax the rich, don't cut spending, ignore the debt. i think that will happen. what is your prediction? >> i will put my kids and your prediction. republicans will take another step, go back another five to ten yards on the football field and the problem will just get even worse. stuart: do you think -- [talking over each other] >> the tech increase, don't anybody forget this, according to three different studies, is going to cost the american econom
for the impasse on the gop. >> they say that their biggest priority is making sure that we deal with the deficit in a serious way but the way they're behaving is that their only priority is making sure that tax breaks for the wealthiest americans are protected. >> reporter: but senators say there is some movement on the issue. >> there's a lot of give and take going on right now but republicans don't want to see new revenues -- in other words, democrat tax increases -- be used for new spending. >> reporter: the president said if there is no deal by the end of the day, the senate should draw up legislation to extend the bush-era tax cuts for the middle class. >> there should be an up-or- down vote. everybody should have a right to vote on that. if republicans doesn't like it they can vote no but i think there is a majority support to make sure that middle class families are held harmless. >> reporter: the senate will be back in session in just a few hours. and even if the senate is able to pass legislation today, it still has to get through the republican-controlled house. live on capitol hill, d
important to step back and see the fact that we have already -- there are three parts of this deficit reduction stool. we've already in the past two years passed $1.6 trillion in spending cuts. we've passed over $700 billion in savings in medicare through reforms like cutting back on overpayments to insurance companies. the one piece of this puzzle that we've not been able to get any support for is making sure that the wealthiest among us help solve this problem by being willing to pay a little bit more to be part of the solution. so we have sent a bill to the house back in july, bipartisan bill that says what -- everybody says they don't want middle-class families to have their taxes go up, well, fine. why don't we start with something we can agree on, which is that? and just pass that. why doesn't the house just pass that? but as we know, the speaker couldn't even pass his own plan to say that up to a million dollars was exempt from tax cuts. so what they're doing is holding middle-class families hostage right now, trying to find some maneuver where the wealthiest people continue to
cut the deficit budget. the court took issue with not with the tax, but taxing household equally. and for the latest headlines log onto foxnews.com. you're watching the most powerful name in news, fox news channel. >> paul: welcome back to this special he edition, journal he had t.editorial report. and this year continued high unemployment and slow economic growth. what can we expect in 2013? we're back with dan henninger, mary anastasia o'grady and dan moore. mary explain the slow growth and the markets. >> if respect to the markets, i would say if you look at a chart for, for example, the s&p 500, you go back to april of 2011 to october of 2012. you're basically flat. there's a lot of churning up and down, but in the last months a pickup there and certainly, from the end of -- from the beginning of this year we saw a run on the market, but you don't have a great return if you're a long-term investor. >> paul: right, so, okay, if growth is still slow, okay, why are-- and some people are still investing in companies and the corporate balance sheets earnings have been pretty good,
expiring unemployment benefits. with the deficit ticking ever higher, patience is wearing thin. >> for those of us who invest in the stock market, it's disgusting to watch them jockey around with our money. >> reporter: missing in all the last-minute negotiations is talk of the $1.2 trillion of mandatory spending cuts scheduled to go into affect today. tara mergener for cbs news, washington. >>> former president george h.w. bush is 88 years old and sent to the hospital last month in houston. he was moved into intensive care december 23rd after developing a fever. doctors say he was -- his condition is improving and he was moved to a regular room yesterday and is in good spirits. >>> looks like plastic shopping bags might be a relic of the past. >> just ahead, the final two days for the bags in an entire bay area county. >> and a look back at some of the year's big stories in the u.s. of a. we'll be right back. ,,,, . >> there is the golden gate bridge, sunny and chilly. a few clouds around. aside from that, a nice day. ,,,,,,,, ban" bandwagon... as the new year begins tuesday.
worried about the state of our country. we run for years over a trillion dollar deficits and it is time for us to do a big fiscal deal in washington that really drives down the trajectory of our debt. we have to do it. and then come in the senate, we have to get back to regular budgeting. i serve on the senate budget committee. since i have been! =-- since i have been te here, even before that, three years since we have any budget in the senate. -- since i have been there, even before that, three years since we have done a budget in the senate. >> new hampshire is a great model. >> absolutely. this to me is the number one overriding priority. and i want to be part of making sure that we finally start getting on the right fiscal track. it is not easy. but there is no easy answer to all of this. and programs like social security and medicare, we have to start talking about how we reform them. because, for example, medicare goes bankrupt in 2024. that is not that far off for people in this room who rely on it. or social security in 2033. we have to have those hard discussions right now to
on more economic growth and deficit reduction. you guys, i can hear you over there. i believe such a proposal could pass both houses with bipartisan majorities. as long as those leaders allow it, to actually come to a vote. if members of the house or the senate want to vote no, they can, but we should let everybody vote. >> i would actually really like to know who he was shushing there. but to his main point, here's what the president intends to do. senators reid and mcconnell will try to come to a deal. if they fail, the white house and harry reid are going to try to jam through a bill that increases taxes on rich people and extends unemployment insurance, which are the two key democratic priorities. they'll pretty much dare republicans to block it. and republicans probably won't be able to, at least not for long. here's johnny isaacson, a republican senator from georgia, over the weekend. >> if we get down to the end of this year, and the only choice we have is to save taxes going up on the middle class, then i would support that. >> last weekend, "the wall street journal" h
. there are basically three pieces to solving the deficit, right? one is spending and we have agrowed to $1.6 trillion in spending cuts in the last two years and the other is spending cuts. we put forth spending cuts of over $700 billion. not cutting care to seniors, but cutting overpayments to insurance companies. the burden of the deficit must not just be on the middle class. the wealthy have to kick in. we sent a bill to the house in july that says 98% americans, income up to 240,000 would continue to get tax cuts. above that, people would may more. they made excuses, the bill wasn't right. we have the bill in the house, the bill in the senate. the bottom line is when the speaker put on the floor last week the bill that would say, okay, how about everybody up to $1 million gets a tax cut. couldn't even pass that. we're stuck. we're really stuck. >> the house gop said they put a bill forward in august. so everyone sort of covering themselves saying we got a bill. we didn't ask to go over the fiscal cliff. i'm kind of glad at 3:00 this afternoon, both sides of the house leader smip and house are meet
a little bit more in taxes to help reduce the deficit. it was rejected by his own party, and so then he sent his members home on vacation. i'm over on the senate side right now, they are in session. speaker boehner let the house members go, so first he walked out of the talks with the president, and then he sent everybody home on vacation. obviously we need to have compromise. the senate bill that passed out of the senate many, many weeks ago had compromise. it was passed by republicans and democrats. all we're asking is that speaker boehner hold a vote on that bill. i don't know why he's afraid to even hoet a vote. hold a vote. that is allowing the process to work, allow democrats and republicans in the house to dash. gregg: he said they already voted on a plan to extend all the tax cuts. >> but they had a vote in the senate on that plan and they voted it down, and then on a bipartisan basis they passed another bill. gregg: 0 out of time. thanks for taking a few moments to be with us. it's good to be with you. chris van hollen. patti ann: former president george h.w. bush remains in in
of extremists in terms of our debt and deficit, that we're going to all of a sudden change that? and why are we changing that? especially since most of this money isn't going to be spent, isn't even going to be initialized for at least two years. i'd ask unanimous consent that that amendment be set aside and amendment 3370 be called up. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from oklahoma, mr. coburn, for himself and mr. mccain, proposes an amendment numbered 3370, as modified. mr. coburn: i'd ask unanimous consent the amendment be considered as read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coburn: and per the request of senator schumer, i put a division in this amendment so we would have two votes on it separating out the fisheries because he thought that was important. i was glad to accommodate his needs. the main -- mr. schumer: will the gentleman yield? mr. coburn: i would be happy to. mr. schumer: i just want to thank him, he was gracious. there are two separate issues here, one of them i think most of us on this side would accept. the
support it and its effort as everybody knows on the deficit reduction. i'm not sure that anybody really listened, at least they put in the effort. that's apolitical, by the way. so in addition, connie noted it was no surprise to her at the time that based on senator simpson's record in the senate and his bipartisanship work, that he would be chasing to be a cochair of the commission. lastly, i just want to say as we understand, mr. hardy had full access to senator simpson's records, diaries, finance, full access. i will say the senator did mention he's been married 57 years, so anybody that gives full access after 57 years, i think that's pretty impressive. but connie just really wanted to welcome everybody and say we are thrilled to be sponsoring this. [applause] >> nowcome i had the pleasure of introducing what i call the bravest man in the world, dawn hardy, author of the book. i don't you could possibly put all this in one book and decide what to leave in and what to take out at a 70s had senator simpson on msnbc cometh and then ann fox, you change the conversation about politics, c
intermediate deficit problem and implementation of the cost saving measures strengthened over time in the aca will deal with their long-term health care problem. so we are not that far away and we have other tremendous strengths in our country that would allow us to make the kind of investment to transform the economy, to do with the reality of stagnant wages and a sense of diminished opportunities. we have strengths. we can do it. we need the public to rain and behavior that's destructive and we need political leaders to act forcefully. given enough to bipartisan commissions and searched enough for bipartisan consensus. for sensible hard all politics along these lines. >> norm, i particularly cutie take the money question. a couple political had a great shared that showed that party polarization in congress was directly correlated with increasing concentrations of wealth from increasing equality went together artisan polarization. and the money question you can handle so many different ways. i'm really concerned about it posed citizens united system with a federal election commission that's
in infrastructure and dealing with the deficits were more -- in a more balanced way. it was about what our obligations are to each other. it was about big things. those are very, very big things. i will say that, for all of the critique about whether our campaign was about big things or not, the preoccupations of people who write about that -- and i used to do that for a living -- i don't try to separate myself -- many of them are my best friends -- there is an awful lot of horse race coverage of this presidential race. there is such a preoccupation with who will win and who will lose and so little real interest in what the implications are. >> we were talking about pulling. >> public polling is so voluminous now. any to kids with an abacus can do a poll of the corner grocery store and some national news are in position will cover it as if it is news. and maybe the billion tommy pulled him out today. -- the billy and tommy poll came out today. it can be done sound yet they produce results that were wholly different than what we knew to be the case. yet it would drive coverage. the gallup p
run for years over a trillion dollar deficits and it is time for us to do a big fiscal deal in washington that really drives down the trajectory of our debt. we have to do it. and then come in the senate, we have to get back to regular budgeting. i serve on the senate budget committee. since i have been! even before that, three years since we have any budget in t senate. -- since i have been there, even before that, three years since we have done a budget in the senate. >> new hampshire is a great model. >> absolutely. this to me is the number one overriding priority. and i want to be part of making sure that we finally start getting on the right fiscal track. it is not easy. but there is no easy answer to all of this. and programs like social security and medicare, we have to start talking about how we reform them. because, for example, medicare goes bankrupt in 2024. that is not that far off for people in this room who rely on it. or social security in 2033. we have to have those discussions right now to strethen america because nobody wants to see us see what happened ieu
to reduce the deficit and then double it, do you think the american electorate was cognizant of the fact that obama doubled in it instead of cutting it in half? why don't the american people care about the debt of the united states of america? guest: i do think they care about it. the economy is the number-one issue. guess what? then it comes down to things like jobs. then you come to the debt. it is not that americans are out of touch with the idea that the government is spending more money than we are taking in. there is lots of concern about whether or not the chinese is holding our debt. so, americans are very concerned and that the question is how you go about addressing this problem -- are very concerned. the question is how you go about addressing this problem. president obama and the democrats are saying we have a combined problem both in terms of not sufficient taxation and also we have to have cuts in spending. we have to do the cuts in spending over time because you do not want to endanger a very fragile economy. to respond directly to your question, why do i think the elector
is not the big agreement that will fully address our debt and deficit. an agreement that we hoped to be able to put together, an agreement that i support, one that includes pro-growth tax reform, bipartisan entitlement reform and finding savings in the federal budget. clearly, these items all need to be addressed, and they need to be addressed on the order of $4 trillion. to really get our deficit and our debt under control. that's the type of deal that i favor, and it's the kind of deal that we have got to get to, but if we can't do it all at once, let's do it in pieces. as the old saying goes, even the longest journey begins with a single step. well, if the first step is this tax deal, let's get going. to break the logjam, let's start with this piece, a tax deal that will ensure that taxes are not increased for middle-class americans. that is something we can and we must do. does it involve compromise? yes, it does, of course. for example, i think we should extend the current tax rates for all taxpayers. real revenue comes from economic growth, not higher taxes. and by closing loopholes an
billion at a time when we are right now, people are sitting in rooms trying to decide how to get deficit reduction. and we pass something that saves $24 billion in a fiscally responsible way, cutting programs. we cut 100 different programs and authorizations. we went through every single page of the farm bill, which is what we ought to be doing in every part of government to be responsible, to make the tough choices, to set good priorities. we did that. and now at the last minute none of that matters? they're trying to stick in an extension that only extends part of the farm programs and keep 100% of the direct subsidies going. madam president, that's amazing to me. i have to say that is absolutely amazing to me. and i want to hear somebody justify that on the floor. now we're going to hear all kinds of things. well, the extension involves possibly a budget point of order. this whole bill coming to the floor is going to have multiple points of order that we're going to have to waive. this is not about procedure or budget points of order. it's about whether or not we mean it when we say w
Search Results 0 to 33 of about 34 (some duplicates have been removed)